Sunday, November 11, 2012

Ethiopian Woman Forced into Sex Slavery in Saudi Arabia

In the Qur'an, Allah said to Muhammad: "We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures" (21:107). Yet the Qur'an openly advocates sex-slavery (4:24, 23:5-6, 33:50, 70:22-30), which has led to unimaginable suffering for generations of women (especially in Saudi Arabia, the heart of the Muslim world). How is Muhammad "a mercy" to sex slaves in Saudi Arabia÷

ADDIS ABABA: An Ethiopian woman revealed that she was the victim of sex slavery after she attempted to find work as a domestic worker in Saudi Arabia.

For H, who asked that her identity remain anonymous, her ordeal began after she took a boat to Yemen, where after two months she was able to cross into Saudi Arabia and was hired by what she told Bikyamasr.com was a “nice couple” for a “decent salary.”

But that is when her horrific experience began. She continues to look down at her hands, ever moving, as she retells what she was forced to endure at the hands of her Saudi bosses.

“I don’t think the wife knew anything that was going on,” she is quick to point out. “But if she did hear my screams and did nothing, I hope she doesn’t sleep well.”

After three weeks of relative calm, H was finding life in southern Saudi Arabia comfortable and she was hoping that much of her first paycheck would be sent back to her family in Addis Ababa. Instead, no money came.

“When the fourth week came around, I was excited because I was being treated well and was doing my job I thought very good,” she continued.

But the day she asked when she would receive money, the husband, who she described as a construction manager, began grabbing her and forced her to the wall. She said she was screaming, but knew that nobody would come to her aid because the wife was out shopping and the two children were at school.

“He ripped my dress off and forced himself onto me. He raped me. This was just the beginning,” she said, tears beginning to form in her eyes.

“He would find me almost daily and rape me. He would force me to work naked in his office if nobody was home. He would tie me up and repeatedly force himself onto me over and over for hours if the wife was out of the house. I can’t imagine that I experienced this,” she added. (Continue Reading.)

75 comments:

Silly Americans, The saudi's aren't rich because they jack up the price of oil after conning us to do all the work to get the oil. It's because of free labor! They're not paying their servants and abusing them. I wonder if THIS, in addition to their paganism, is another reason why God cursed Saudi Arabia in the bible.

It is a normal practice in Saudi Arabia to abuse the housemaid. Muslims just pray 5 times and then they do all kinds of bad things. They go to Bahrain for sex and drink during weekends. Since I worked there for about 10 years I know these things. Anyway there are good people as well, but most people go other countries for sex. They treat the housemaid very badly or inhumanly, they don't even think the housemaid also a human being. So sad but nothing we could do.Panneer

Panneer, If I understand the abuse goes beyond housemaids. I saw a video a while back of Saudi Princes abusing a garbageman. One guy videotaped a prince whipping this man and this man was crying. I wanted to jump through my screen and throttle the prince. Absolutely sickening.

If this thing had happened in the West, OSAMA ABDALLAH would be shouting from the roof tops to implement Shariah which will stop such inhumane acts. However, Saudi Arabia is the capital of Islam where all of the inhumane laws of Sharia, i.e., flogging, cutting off hands etc etc, are implemented. But yet, it is far from being Disney world of Islam.

I had the opportunity to visit Abu Dhabi for few days. I was shocked to find out that prostitution is so big there. It is easier to get a prostitute there then here in the States. Not only prostitution, alcohol is also readily available. But then again, if Allah allows prostitution then why won’t it be found in Islamic countries. And why won’t moslim men be rapping women when it is allowed to do so in Islam. The irony is that people like OSAMA ABDALLAH have no shame in condemning others when it is worse in Islam. Allah himself allows rape and promotes it.

But then again, per Osama Abdallah, it is CIA that is making Islam look bad. It is CIA who is spreading rumors like this rape incidence. It is CIA that is behind each suicide attack. It is CIA that is concealing evidence of moon splitting in half. Correct Mr. Abdallah.

Jamel Hassan said, 'It is haram (forbidden) in Islam to keep slaves unless they are taken in war. This includes the idea of housemaids. Islam does not allow it. With regards to slaves taken in war.'

My response: and your point is what? The article is talking about what is happening by Muslim men to servants. It's also happening to poor immigrants being forced to work in construction, sanitation, etc. talking about an obscure hadith that Muhammad may have said once doesn't mean it's not happening and I bet if asked they would call themselves Muslim. If you never met them and they rolled out their prayer mat next to you to pray you'd never know them different.But yet your the perfect Muslim, right?Clean up your side of the aisle first before you tell us what we're supposed to think about your religion.

Jamal said: "It is haram (forbidden) in Islam to keep slaves unless they are taken in war."

Interesting statement. So let me ask you this, Jamal: Since it is haram to keep slaves unless they are taken in war, if I can show you that Muhammad kept slaves that he did not capture in war, you will agree to call him a sinner worthy of punishment, right? (Better be pretty careful how you answer. I know Muslims tend to say whatever pops into their heads as long as it helps defend Islam, but a lot of what you've said in your desperate attempts to defend Islam can be used to condemn your prophet. I've been letting you get away with a lot in order to let you keep building your own case against Muhammad, but judgment time has arrived.)

Jamal Hassan, you make a statement in order to defend Islam that, “It is haram (forbidden) in Islam to keep slaves unless they are taken in war.” And then you give us the hadith to prove it. This hadith actually contradicts you on two points.

First, in this hadith, the slaves are called your brothers which mean that they are moslims. We know that Christians and Jews are not your brothers since the quran calls them infidels and an infidel cannot be your brother. Now if the only way you can have slaves is thru war, then, prove to me that moslems can go to war with each other and either side can keep prisoners as slaves. I believe that you will not be able to provide any quranic evidence or Allah’s command to do so. Therefore, we conclude that this hadith is obviously talking about slaves obtained by other than war. And obviously, just from reading this hadith, moslems are allowed to have moslem (men or women) slaves.

Secondly, your statement is self-contradicting. “It is haram (forbidden) in Islam to keep slaves unless they are taken in war.” IS IT HARAM TO HAVE SLAVES IN ISLAM OR NOT? Either it is or it is not regardless of the method how you get a slave. According to you, in Islam to keep slaves is not haram if the slaves are taken in war. Correct? Then we can say that slavery is ok in Islam. Regardless of what condition you might want to impose on it, the fact of the matter is that slavery is allowed in Islam.

On a side note, (whisper) I don’t know if you know, rape is also allowed in Islam.

The Lord lifts up the weak, he strengthens those in need.The men and women who have raised their hands against the people whose suffering is reported here will carry their crimes to the judgment.No matter how much they cringe, they will never hide their guilt.They say that the angel that ministers at judgment has a tongue of fire. Truly, these workers of magic do not dread being judged, they are so much in the dark.

"David, it's common Islamic law you can look it up. Slaves can only be taken in war. I do not think I need to post all the fatawa (rulings) about this matter. "

You are the one making the claim, so you should be the one to prove it. so, you don't feel like you need to provide evidence? Again, you're acting like Muslims should have special privileges over non-muslims (i.e. you expect non-muislims to prove everything, even very basic questions about Chrisitanity, but don't feel you need to provide proof yourself!).

Cristo quoted Jamaal as saying, ""David, it's common Islamic law you can look it up. Slaves can only be taken in war. I do not think I need to post all the fatawa (rulings) about this matter."

Cristo is right. If fatwas are from the hadith and Koran then posting the fatwas isn't necessary. Just give the hadith and koran references. Should be easy enough do and a much shorter task.Oh, and you don't need to post all fatwas if they are so numerous. Only one or two will suffice.

But will that happen? Probably not. This was a post to bulk up credibility in Islam and yourself. Ideologies don't need to be defend, only accepted or rejected.

The Prophet said, "The freed slave belongs to the people who have freed him," or said something similar.

Muhammad sells a slave for money. He was thus a slave trader.Sahih BukhariVolume 3, Book 34, Number 351:Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah:

A man decided that a slave of his would be manumitted after his death and later on he was in need of money, so the Prophet took the slave and said, "Who will buy this slave from me?" Nu'aim bin 'Abdullah bought him for such and such price and the Prophet gave him the slave.

Slaves are property. They cannot be freed if an owner has outstanding debt, but can be used to pay off the debt.

Sahih BukhariVolume 3, Book 41, Number 598:Narrated Jabir: A man manumitted a slave and he had no other property than that, so the Prophet cancelled the manumission (and sold the slave for him). No'aim bin Al-Nahham bought the slave from him.

A woman is rebuked by Muhammad for freeing a slave girl. The prophet tells her that she would have gotten a greater heavenly reward by giving her to a relative (as a slave).Sahih BukhariVolume 3, Book 47, Number 765:Narrated Kurib:

the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles."

You can free them, but there is no stipulation for you to not to continue taking more. And you would also get a greater reward if you give them to a relative.

A man freed six slaves on the event of his death, but Muhammad reversed the emancipation and kept four in slavery to himself. He cast lots to determine which two to free.

Sahih MuslimBook 015, Number 4112:'Imran b. Husain reported that a person who had no other property emancipated six slaves of his at the time of his death. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) called for them and divided them into three sections, cast lots amongst them, and set two free and kept four in slavery; and he (the Holy Prophet) spoke severely of him.

You live a lie ad you spew lies. You seek what you want and dismiss what you dont. Thats called confirmation bias.

And can you show me reference to Umm Walid? I cant find anything about that. But I have found this.

The Scholars of al-Azhar in Egypt

In his book, "You Ask and Islam Answers", Dr. 'Abdul-Latif Mushtahari, the general supervisor and director of homiletics and guidance at the Azhar University, says (pp. 51,52),

"Islam does not prohibit slavery but retains it for two reasons. The first reason is war (whether it is a civil war or a foreign war in which the captive is either killed or enslaved) provided that the war is not between Muslims against each other - it is not acceptable to enslave the violators, or the offenders, if they are Muslims. Only non-Muslim captives may be enslaved or killed. The second reason is the sexual propagation of slaves which would generate more slaves for their owner."

The text is plain that all prisoners of war must either be killed or become slaves. The ancient scholars are in full agreement over this issue, such as Ibn Timiyya, Ibn Hisham, Malik etc. Ibn Timiyya says (Vol. 32, p. 89),

"The root of the beginning of slavery is prisoners of war; the bounties have become lawful to the nation of Muhammad."

Then (Vol. 31, p. 380), he indicates clearly and without shame,

"Slavery is justified because of the war itself; however, it is not permissible to enslave a free Muslim. It is lawful to kill the infidel or to enslave him, and it also makes it lawful to take his offspring into captivity.

This question was delivered to Ibn Timiyya who was Mufti of Islam (Vol. 31, pp. 376, 377),

"A man married a maid-slave who bore him a child. Would that child be free or would he be an owned slave?"

Ibn Timiyya says emphatically,

"Her child whom she bore from him would be the property of her master according to all the Imams (heads of the four Islamic schools of law) because the child follows the (status) of his mother in freedom or slavery. If the child is not of the race of Arabs, then he is definitely an owned slave according to the scholars, but the scholars disputed (his status) among themselves if he was from the Arabs - whether he must be enslaved or not because when A'isha (Muhammad's wife) had a maid-slave who was an Arab, Muhammad said to A'isha, `Set this maid free because she is from the children of Ishmael.'"

"a man who sells a free man and consumes his price (makes him a slave)"

To begin with, this is the only way i found that hadith:

Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “Allah says: ‘There are three whose opponent I will be on the Day of Resurrection: a man who makes a promise in My name then breaks his word, a man who sells a free man and consumes his price, and a man who employs another and benefits from him (his labor), then does not give him his wages.’”

Maybe you got it from another place where this "(makes him a slave)" was added. Anyway even if we use this verse nowhere it says you can't take a free man as a slave but you can't sell a free man, which is different. Anyway all this subject is funny because even if we assume your position that in Islam you can only take a slave during war, and you are commanded to make war against every non muslim in the world (Sura 9:29) that means you are commanded to make war against everyone and while you are doing that, take not only Ethipians non muslims as Slaves but every non muslim you invade , so even if we assume you are right, Islam is still so wicked that you have to be really blind to not see it (not mentioning how bad and perverse Muslims are with the slaves)..May God Open your eyes.

So you cant support your claim that children of slaves are to be freed. Thank you for admitting that. Yes you can take as many slaves as you want, force them to have sex with you even if they are married (rape and adultery). What you are referencing is the taking of slaves through war. And you admit that if a Muslim man rapes his slave then that child because of his or her being a product of the slave owner is free. But if a child is born from two slaves, then that child is a slave and so on and so on. So that is horrendous. Thats horrible. What do you think is so moral about that?

1. you can continue to take slave2. you can sell and purchase slaves3. you get more reward for giving a slave to a relative4. you can trade slaves5. you can force slaves to have sex with you even if they are married6. if you have a child with the slave that child is free but its Mother is still a slave7. if two slaves have a child that child is still a slave8. you cannot provide evidence for your assertion so it is baseless9. Ibn-i-Majah is so weak. also provide the source for it. dont just throw out a name, give me a site or something to reference. I can throw out names as well. That is not a refutation

Now what do you think is so moral and just about these rulings? It is completely immoral and bigoted. If you think that having a child with a slave and by virtue of that child being half a free Muslim is some type of great moral victory then I would have to completely disagree. That is immoral, unjust, and quite frankly scary that you would think this some type of virtue!

Furthermore, the Holy Bible expressly prohibits slavery. Exodus 21:16 “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.

This is repeated in Deuteronomy 24:7 " If a man is caught kidnapping one of his brother Israelites and treats him as a slave or sells him, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you."

Now, Jamal you may say that 'Well it's talking about a fellow israelite, but Muhammad was an Arab and he took other ARABs as slaves who were not Muslims.

Muhammad violated God's law, over and over again he violated it. He was made in the image and likeness of God and therefore as Romans puts it, he was without excuse. He died a slave trader and blasphemer, a liar and a thief. He is waiting to stand before a Holy God where the book of his life will be opened before him, and his name was not in the Lamb's book of life. He will be bound hand and foot and tossed into the lake of fire made specifically for the devil and his angels.

Jamal, you asked for a New Testament reference. Here is one, there's a lot more to research.

1 Timothy 1:5-11 5. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6.Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, 7. desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.

8. Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9. understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10. the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, ENSLAVERS, LIARS, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11.in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.

Jamal, I noticed you asked for a 'NEW TESTAMENT' reference. Not a bible reference that could come from the OLD TESTAMENT. You know the bible prohibits slavery. The reference in Leviticus used to say it endorses it is taken WAY out of context because that's not slavery it was a WORK contract that would end. But here's the truly sad thing Jamal, you're no better than Mohammad. You're really not. You've lied. You've taken things without permission regardless of their value (maybe from your mom or your sibling or a coworker or friend), you've blasphemed by either using God's name as a curse word or propaganda falsehood in his name (I think we consider Da'wah blasphemy just as I do if I confront a Jehovah's Witness or A Mormon because you're promoting a false gospel and attributing it to him), and you've had lustful thoughts. How do I know this? Because so have I. So has David Wood. So has Cristo, so Search for Truth, so has foolster. Everyone has because EVERYONE HAS SINNED AND FALLEN SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD. God is just, he will punish every single sin Jamal because he doesn't care that it was a little white lie, or that it was for Islam. He doesn't care that you took your siblings book or magazine or video game. He doesn't care that it was only that one time you glanced at an attractive person and had a lustful thought for a second. JAMAL HE DOESN'T CARE.He cares that you told a lie. He cares that you stole. He cares that you committed adultery or fornication in your heart. And for these things he must punish because he is just. He sent Jesus, who created you and is holy, into the world to live the perfect life you could NEVER LIVE and die a death YOU DESERVE TO die. By turning from your sins (start with Islam) and using the law properly as a guide to how he is holy and you are not, and putting your trust that Jesus paid for all your sins, you can have something Muhammad for all his greed could never attain....peace with God.

Jamal said, "Well lying deliberately in Islam is a major sin. And I do not know who you are trying to fool here. The Bible is silent on abolishment of slavery. Every educated person knows this." Matthew 18:25 was a part of a PARABLE, it was not advocating slavery. Your quotes from Ephesians, Colossians and Corinthians are dealing with those already in a working relationship. You note where it says to treat them fairly, right? And not withhold pay or wages. Yeah, you don't pay slaves. Furthermore, you accuse me of lying? I knew to expect a nasty reaction from you. YOU sir are trying to take verses out of context and divert attention. Why? Because you hate the truth and you're trying to suppress it in unrighteousness, which is what people who dwell IN THE DARK do because you can't stand the truth.

Next you said, "God is Just and Merciful. If we can forgive our children, surely God can forgive us. He is All-Powerful, able to do anything. If you can force yourself to believe that god is limited and he has no choice but to transfer our sins to an innocent, then surely you can believe that God is able to transfer sins away from us and extinguish these sins."

But he's not. He's holding everyone accountable. He won't 'just extinguish' sins. If He punished Jesus, who knew NO SIN, believe he will punish you.

Next you said, "He has given us examples in the Quran of nations who strayed after their prophets told them the truth."

Depends who you mean 'he' is. If the creator God is who you're speaking of, it's YHWH and he didn't send down the Quran. There are examples in the bible of those who rebelled and who were punished.

Then you said, "Jesus came and told his people to worship God alone, when he left his people strayed and started worshipping him."

Patently false. You can't prove that from the Quran nor the bible because it's not in there.

Then you said, "Islam is not the most convenient religion. It is not our choice to pray 5 times a day, to fast, etc. But that is God's command. Islam as the final religion combines the Law of Moses and the Faith of Jesus into one religion. We have been given the infallible Book that repeatedly points us to Allah's signs."

Also proven false. The Quran reflects works based righteous, the bible does not. Jesus said in John 5:46 'If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me'

The WHOLE bible is about Jesus. Not Muhammad.

You also said, "Islam is not the most convenient religion. It is not our choice to pray 5 times a day, to fast, etc. But that is God's command" No it's not. It's not in the Quran to pray five times a day, nor is it in the Quran to fast. And once again, YHWH did not send down the Quran. You also said, "The punishment awaits for those who reject it and mock the Messenger just as the punishment awaits those who rejected the miracles of other prophets and those who mocked the other prophets."

Give me one instance in the bible where people mocked signs. Not prophets, but signs. Just one.

Last, you said, "When you're in the dark for a while, you do not like the light to be shone into your eyes, but eventually as you keep your eyes open you do get used to it."

I knew I was going to get a strong reaction out of you when I posted it and I was right.

You lied in this post. You've also taken verses out of context. Additionally you denied what God decreed and attributed his attributes to Allah, which is Blasphemy.

You need a savior Jamal. You need someone who can not only provide a perfect life lived, take punishment on your behalf and give you a brand new nature. The Quran, Allah and Mohammad are only encourage your sin.

"Every educated person knows this."There you go again, using that arrogant variatio of the phrase "everyone agrees with me". You've used this a few times (like your claim about every scholar agreeing that the bible has errors, which is false, or your claim that all scholars agree that the Najran were preparing for war, which you could only find 1 scholar who says this), and yet you keep accusing OTHERS of being arrogant! Don't you think this is hypocritical? You also misrepresent the bible by taking verses out of context, and then scream that people are taking the Quoranic verses out of context. Isn't that hypocritical?

I urge you to read Deleting's post, think about it a moment (really think about how maybe he's right) and then carefully read it again. Don't skim. I am praying you will turn to the light.

***CORRECTION***I told Jamal in my last reply, "Patently false. You can't prove that from the Quran nor the bible because it's not in there. "

I need to clarify. They DID worship Jesus in the bible but it was done with his full knowledge and expectation. Thomas worshipped Jesus. The wise men worshipped Jesus. All his disciples worshipped Jesus.Jesus said worship God alone, but God as the Jews understood him at that time was a Triune being of father, son and holy ghost.

So you deflect to Christianity when you cant respond? Thats your answer?

So you want to change the topic in order to not respond? Thats ridiculous.

Christianity was a major impetus in the movement to abolish the age-old institution of slavery. Yet, abolition had to be imposed on the Islamic world by the European West.

Abolitionists taught that as liberty was a gift from God it was therefore wrong to take someoneelse’s liberty from them by force or for someone to sell their liberty to someone else. According to John Wesley, ‘Liberty is the right of every human creature.’ The Exodus of the Israelites fromEgypt was used to highlight God’s opposition to enforced slavery. They also quoted verses such asProverbs 14: 31 (‘Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker’) and Job 30: 25 (‘Did not Iweep for him whose day was hard to show God’s compassion for the poor’), or Jesus’ words inLuke: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me…to preach deliverance to the captives, to release theprisoners.

Abolitionists repeatedly quoted the Golden Rule in Matt 7 v12 (‘Whatever you wish that otherswould do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.’)

1 Corinthians 7:23You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.

That is not how a debate works. I will not explain my position until you prove your position.

Christians CANNOT commit adultery. Muslims can commit adultery with their slaves, even by force. If a Muslim man has a child with a slave that child is free (according to you, there is no evidence of this). But the free child's siblings remain slaves by virtue of both parents being slaves.

So under Islamic rule if two slaves are married, or the Muslim man is married you are permitted to fornicate with the married slave even if you are married.

Now tell me how moral and what a virtue this is.

Your Allah and false Prophet ordained sin, and evil. Now I will be waiting for the answer without deflection.

And you can also reference "deletings" posts for more evidence. Thanks.

I still havent seen your response. And yes Christ NEVEr took slaves and clearly said love thy neighbor as thyself. He didnt say love only thy Christian neighbor as thyself. Which Islam states!

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

You also gave this as evidence for your position.

"And those who HAVE FAITH and do righteous good deeds, they are dwellers or paradise, they will dwell therein forever." (2:82)

But here is your dilemma. What is a good and righteous deed?

Mohamed contradicted himself, Allah, and all of the previous Prophets by redefining righteous good deeds.

You are taking the secular and Christian morals and acting as if they are consistent with Islamic perception of good and righteous deeds.

But nothing could be further from the truth.

In Islam it is good and righteous to subjugate, enslave or slaughter all non Muslims who will not bow to Islamic rule or pay the jizya extortion or be enslaved. It is good and righteous to take children as wives, rape female captives even if they are married and you yourself are married, torture people, be a bigot, beat your wife, take captives, lie in defense or propagation of Islam etc...

So first you must define what is good and rightoues. Because if I committed half of the atrocities that Mohamed and Islam permits i would be hunted down and executed for crimes against humanity!

Im sorry, but you make absolutely no sense. If good and righteous deeds includes subjugating or slaughtering a group of people solely on the basis that they dont belong to your group then that is not good and righteous, neither is taking slaves and raping the married female captives. Thats the problem with Muslims! They cannot think their way out of it.

"The secular world in itself is a sin. And those with education know that the only obstacle facing the secular world right now is Islam. But Islam is God's religion, and so you are not just going against Muslims, you are going up against Allah."

Np we are not going up against God. We are going up against your Allah whom we reject as God and we reject your false hypocrite lying prophet as well.

The secular wolrd is a dream compared to sharia. At least in the secular world people have a choice, they are not discriminated against like under sharia. People are taqxed equally regardless of race or religion. People have equal rights regardless of race or religion, married women cannot be raped when they are taken captive, slavery is prohibited, but not in Islam.

You air are so delusional and so indoctrinated you cant think your way out of it!

[It is] a day (read yawmu) when no soul will be of any avail, any use, to another soul, and the [absolute] command on that day will be God’s: there will be no [power of] command for anyone other than Him thereat, in other words, none has been given the power to mediate thereupon, in contrast to [situations] in this world.

But lets stop jumping all over the place. Lets concentrate on one thing. You like to jump all over and deflect to other topics. Sio we have established these basic facts.

1. you can continue to take slave2. you can sell and purchase slaves3. you get more reward for giving a slave to a relative4. you can trade slaves5. you can force slaves to have sex with you even if they are married6. if you have a child with the slave that child is free but its Mother is still a slave7. if two slaves have a child that child is still a slave8. you cannot provide evidence for your assertion so it is baseless9. Ibn-i-Majah is so weak. also provide the source for it. dont just throw out a name, give me a site or something to reference. I can throw out names as well. That is not a refutation

Jamal said, "But still, my point is that the Bible is not against slavery. You mentioned some verses in the Old Testament against slavery. How would that coincide with say Leviticus 25:44-46:"

Why would you think the whole bible hinges on Leviticus 25:44-46? Two verses proves slavery???

What of the other 65 books in the bible that show God's law is against slavery?

The code of Leviticus was for the Israelite going into the promised land and were going to occupy it.

It was local to those people in that day but it doesn't advocate slavery. The 'heathens' were people who were poor and needed money who lived in the surrounding areas. They had protection of the law, same as an Israelite, from abuse and sexual exploitation and if one of their brothers could buy their freedom they were free to leave.

That's not slavery. That's still a work contract and better setup than Sharia would provide.

Tell you what, lets look at today. Western world who has free access to the bible and has churches and people can worship YHWH and then lets look at the Eastern world where the bible is treated like toilet paper.

The countries with the highest infractions of human rights violations are where? In America? We got the whole gay parade pouting over 30 states not willing to redefine marriage? Hmm, Canada? They're Americans without Guns (but apparently they have common sense for not getting into the stupid financial mess we got in, Go Canada eh?) I know, it's Norway...then again most women are being raped by, ahem,'Somali immigrants' and chastity belt sales are at an all time high. Somali immigrants who more likely than not bow to Mecca 5 times a day to pray and call God 'Allah'. No, i think the only place where rape and forced prostitution, beatings, entrapment by promising jobs with money and then not paying them while raping and beating them, would have to be in places like Saudi Arabia, UAE, 'So call Palestine', Iran, Irag, Pakistan, Afghanistan....

Jamal you are still blaspheming God by taking two verses in the bible and trying to say his word condones this to try and sell the Quran for being true. You. Need. Help. You need a heart change. You need the blinders lifted and you need to turn from Islam because you build your argument from two verses.

By the way, did you even bother to read ALL of Leviticus 25? I didn't think so. This was between an Israelite and a Heathen, probably a Moabite, Ammonite, Syrian, etc. The Heathen had the right to be protected from harm, and if they could buy their freedom could be free. That's not how slavery works. You either lure your intended victim or kidnap them outright and force them into your service. You get to treat them anyway you want to (go back and read the article)and you don't have to pay them. That, my friend, is slavery. Hiring on someone who is poor and having an expectation not to abuse them is not.

Jamal your second response to me was all over the place and I gave up reading it after five times. Try not to post when your upset.

Here's what I gleam from this: You said, "But I also know:"And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another." (Quran 17:15)" Yet you have Sahih hadith who say a Jew or Christian will be your rescue from hellfire. It's gonna take a while to find that reference but if any of the other guys have it, can you post in in thread so Jamal can read it?

Then you said, "It is not our place to limit God and say he cannot forgive sin and he HAS to do this and do that. "

Agreed. But I wasn't doing that. God has already said what he will do and how he will deal with sin. I was paraphrasing it. Your first statement though was " If we can forgive our children, surely God can forgive us." Aren't you saying God 'HAS' to do this or that?

You said, "Most of the world is in rebellion right now. It is not fair that humans at one time were punished for their sins but now they are not. There are no examples of people rejecting that god has a son and therefore getting punished."

1. You don't decide what's fair verses not fair.

2. You're confusing disciple verses punishment. Disciple is God using your environment or his word and spirit to convict you when sin. Punishment is all consuming torment for sin. People are discipled all the time. Cities and countries are discipled all the time.

Some could even go as far as to say this country (USA) is being discipled by having to endure another four years of Barack Obama and his express lane he's building ALL the way to Planned Parenthood.

I think it's a little harsh too but the again, I don't get to decide what is fair vs unfair and God's pretty ticked about the 4000+ abortions/day just in this country alone.

Punishment comes for all those outside of Jesus because they were found in their sins AND rejected God's truth.

Now, having said that how do you think God is carrying out disciple? Some would say superstorm Sandy and the BP oil spill were God's disciple on us. The Islamic uprising is also God's judgment on the middle east. And the worst is yet to come for everyone.

Next post Jamal said, "The Quran is clear as it says over and over again that faith comes before good works and abiding of the Law. You need both. "

That is works based righteousness you're describing. IN works based theology you have to have faith, but it's not enough. You need to do good works and obey the law, hence 'works righteousness'. Why do you not see that?

And by the way, the hadith is illustrating motives, not absconding works.

As a side note, can you please post the citation for the hadith so others can look it up? It just helps with continuity and following along.

Then you said, "It is the complete religion that requires faith and works. It combines all ideas into the final religion for humanity. Example seen in Jesus. Most Jews reject him. Most Christians ascribe divinity to him. Both are the results of misguidance." Lemme guess, because the Quran says so. You realize if the Quran is the rambling of a man who was trying to bolster himself so he could get war booty, regular booty, acclaim and notority, than DUH! It's going to show this. However, there is NO such thing as a monolith monothestic religion. Jews are no exception. They follow tradition over scripture whereas Christians follow scripture over tradition. Go back and read the gospels sometime you see Jesus tapping the Pharisees on their practice of tradition over scripture. However I digress. Your wrong on your statement. Scripture FORCES Christians to accept what IT ascribes, the divinity of Jesus. Not the other way around. Ask JohnnyZ if he's still around. He was muslim and Unitarian and now he's tritarian and christian.

However, Jamal tapped me on something when I said, "You said, "nor is it in the Quran to fast."

He quoted the verse. Good on ya. I concede the point. And I am really not trying to take it back here but I meant Ramadan fast. I didn't think of the other fasts that go on. However it's in there. My bad. I'm only human

Then you said, "By mocking signs I mean rejecting them. There is nothing in the Bible about prophets performing miracles and the people rejecting? I do not know myself. Perhaps you can explain."

Me talking to Jamal continued: There's not Jamal. That was my point. Miracles were supposed to accompany the message to authenticate it, not to be IT.

That's the difference here. You call the Quran 'The miracle'. It's not the miracle, it's a message. Had Muhammad been sent from YHWH there would have been signs from God. There WASN'T.There's no miracles that he did. There's no object lessons he was ordered to give to the people. There was no prophecy he gave which lines up with the bible. Muhammad wasn't required to go through humiliations BY GOD as lessons to the people. He wasn't tossed in a cistern like Jerimiah. He wasn't ordered what to name his children like Hosea, David and Isaiah. He wasn't forced to marry a woman who would publicly cheat on him, baring two children who were products of her adultery. He was uprooted from his home and exiled to Babylon and forced to watch the temple be destroyed like Ezekiel was. And he wasn't widowed like Ezekiel was. Not like Khalida or Sowda. Ezekiel loved his wife and 24:18 is God telling him 'I've decided your wife will die tomorrow'. Oh and...don't mourn like everyone else does. Ezekiel was told that too. You miss the entire point of WHY God allowed mistreatment. This wasn't a 'Jewish' thing. This wasn't a 'Gentile' thing. This was about Sin. The prophets spoke about it. Muhammad at the very least, misunderstood it. He didn't get that God will punish all sin and that punishment is eternity in neverending torment unless someone who can handle punishment takes your place. He didn't get it. I know islam teaches about hell, but it's less than what the bible says about it. And Jamal, you need to consider that. I know you love islam, but you shouldn't love it past all reason and common sense. The bible talks about God setting up this earth without any human intervention. He supplied it and populated it with two people who he wanted to have relationship with. They sinned. Sin and death came into the world. God promised right there in the third Chapter of Genesis he's send someone to save people from their sins and the eternal effects thereof because nothing unholy can stand in his presence. Muhammad didn't get it, either that or Allah wasn't God and he wanted to lie to people so they'd go to hell. And YHWH isn't going to care why you believed the lie, only that you did. And that you lie, and steal and have bad thoughts and harbor anger (which Jesus said was just like murdering someone.) Someone HAS to take your place to spare you from hell. If not Jesus, then who?

Okay Jamal I am traveling today and trying to get some work done so I won't be able to respond until later. I will ask some of my christan brothers and sisters to respond if need be because he just kicked out a bunch of Islamic rhetoric again chock full o confirmation bias.

I've had to read through the posts several times and honestly, Jamal, I don't know if you're trying to draw me down a rabbit hole or if you're just very emotion when you respond.

I'm going to break this down as follows in one post.

Slavery. You said, "Produce a scholar that says the Bible prohibits slavery. It does not. It is silent on the issue. Every reputable source says that. It is a fact." I produced an ACTUAL VERSE and you weren't happy. Tell you what, you tell me what reputable bible scholar (BIBLE, not Quran) says it's mum on the issue. The word 'employee' wasn't around back then, the best they had was 'bondservant' but it WAS NOT slavery. Quit saying that it is. The punishment for kidnapping a man and selling him or exploiting him (ALSO KNOWN AS SLAVERY) was DEATH...to be administered LITERALLY. That's it. I am DONE addressing this with you. It does prohibit it. Period. The end. Next topic: you said, "Aren't you saying God 'HAS' to do this or that?”No as you see I said “can.” So can we agree that God has the ability to extinguish sin?" 'Can' has got nothing to do with it. It's what he said he will do. He will NOT change his mind. ALL SIN IS PUNISHED. HE HAS ALREADY SAID THIS, THEREFORE 'EXTINGUISHING SIN IS NOT POSSIBLE...NOT BECAUSE HE CAN'T BUT BECAUSE HE WON'T. You have told lies, you have stolen, you have harbored anger in your heart which is the same as murder. Also, you had earlier said it wasn't right to put sins on an innocent person, and I pointed out you have hadith that will do just that. That was the whole reason I brought that out.Now, this part I need to address to you. You said, "So god created everything, created two humans, created the devil to tempt them into sin, then killed himself to pay for these sins. And he did not provide any refuge for us from the devil…he gave us with a nature to sin knowing that we would sin but then he killed himself for the sake of some humans."

No, this is not what happened. The bible teaches that man is made in God's image and rebelled. By his rebellion we now live with the effects of sin as well as sin, therefore making us imperfect and out of communion with God. God is just and will punish all sin but he came down from heaven to take wrath and punishment due to us. We deserve hell. God took that wrath due us. Those who don't turn from their sins and put trust in Jesus will get that wrath poured out on them. He didn't commit suicide. Don't take a cheap shot like that at him.

cont...Next: you said, "I do not know where you get your information from. Muhammad was persecuted, expelled, all his male infant children died early, etc etc etc. Widowed? So he did not love Khadija? Wow. Oh my. I do implore you to look up Muhammad’s love for Khadijah. You seriously need to think before you post brother." You missed the point entirely. My point was the prophets of the old testament went through worse treatment than Muhammad did. Muhammad, by comparison, had it WAY better in terms of perseccution (he got to live didn't he? Not like Isaiah who was sawed in half), he got his pick of wives, he got to have sex with whoever he wanted to. I'm not even going there with you on his love for khadidjah because it's not apart of the argument. The point was treatment of old testament prophets verses muhammad's treatment. You should really look at that because it's pretty telling about what kind of God you're really dealing vwith.

The next: miracles. Dude, you make NO SENSE. First, I'm right and then thee Quran's the miracle then you post a bunch of stuff and end up with '19'. That's not a miracle. Maybe a mystery but that's pushing the definition just a tad. More like you have a number appearing 19. But then after you agree with me, and then hop into 'it really is a miracle part' you then say, "He did quite a few miracles."

What miracles did he do? You don't get to count the quran as a miracle, nor point to an act of war. What miracles did he do. Don't answer if you can't produce the hadith or verse in the Quran.

But then you tell me, " Please read it in entirety." You read it, i presume, daily, and yet you can't manage to keep with a position as simple as 'miracles'. A miracle, by the way, is defined as:A surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is considered to be divine.A highly improbable or extraordinary event, development, or accomplishment.Now, using this definition, point to something in the Quran that fits this description, or don't answer at all. Last, you said, "Could you please be more clear. I do not understand what you are saying. Scripture also forces Muslims to accept what it ascribes. What are you trying to say?" No it doesn't. This is more you trying to imitate a point I made, however I'll bite on this one and break it down for you.

I mean Scripture as in the Old testament, Gospels and apostolic writings. This forces us to accept our position. If you were following it, you wouldn't be muslim. You would be Christian.

Sorry I cant keep up with this as often as i would like. But i will when I can.

"You mentioned K'ab. In Islam, in extenuating circumstances such as war you are allowed to lie to defeat your enemy. You must have heard about Taqiyyah. K'ab was very powerful and influential. He was inciting violence with poetry, which was the medium of that day."

This is preposterous. So criticism is a valid excuse to go and lie in order to assassinate people? Ok so then we have every right to go and assassinate leaders like Morsi and every other critic of the US and Israel. When your Ummah calls for the destruction of the West and Israel we are then justified in killing them. If you want to be consistent then you would have to agree.

Just like I said you would justify immoral behavior. You are saying that it is ok to sin when it is beneficial to your cult or someone says something negatively about Mohamed or your Ummah. And you cant see anything wrong with this? That is rationalizing sin. Just like I said you would do. So I guess its ok to lie and pretend you are friendly with me or anyone who criticizes Islam or Mohamed so you can get near to them so you can kill us. Correct?

No that did not suffice at all. Most of those were speaking about other Muslims. And paying respect to a Jews funeral means nothing in light of all of the commands to subjugate, oppress, extort, or slaughter all non Muslims! Non Muslims do NOT have equal rights under Islamic rule.

I also noticed that you did not give the book and number for these hadith. Why is that?

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

The Believers are but a single Brotherhood (49:10)

Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors. (3:110)

Those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. (98:6)

Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. (8:55)

Sorry I cant keep up with this as often as i would like. But i will when I can.

"You mentioned K'ab. In Islam, in extenuating circumstances such as war you are allowed to lie to defeat your enemy. You must have heard about Taqiyyah. K'ab was very powerful and influential. He was inciting violence with poetry, which was the medium of that day."

This is preposterous. So criticism is a valid excuse to go and lie in order to assassinate people? Ok so then we have every right to go and assassinate leaders like Morsi and every other critic of the US and Israel. When your Ummah calls for the destruction of the West and Israel we are then justified in killing them. If you want to be consistent then you would have to agree.

Just like I said you would justify immoral behavior. You are saying that it is ok to sin when it is beneficial to your cult or someone says something negatively about Mohamed or your Ummah. And you cant see anything wrong with this? That is rationalizing sin. Just like I said you would do. So I guess its ok to lie and pretend you are friendly with me or anyone who criticizes Islam or Mohamed so you can get near to them so you can kill us. Correct?

No that did not suffice at all. Most of those were speaking about other Muslims. And paying respect to a Jews funeral means nothing in light of all of the commands to subjugate, oppress, extort, or slaughter all non Muslims! Non Muslims do NOT have equal rights under Islamic rule.

I also noticed that you did not give the book and number for these hadith. Why is that?

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

The Believers are but a single Brotherhood (49:10)

Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors. (3:110)

Those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. (98:6)

Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. (8:55)

Narrated Anas bin Malik:Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik,"O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."Sahih Bukhari 1:8:387, See also: Sahih Bukhari 1:2:24

I asked 'Ali "Do you have anything Divine literature besides what is in the Qur'an?" Or, as Uyaina once said, "Apart from what the people have?" 'Ali said, "By Him Who made the grain split (germinate) and created the soul, we have nothing except what is in the Quran and the ability (gift) of understanding Allah's Book which He may endow a man, with and what is written in this sheet of paper." I asked, "What is on this paper?" He replied, "The legal regulations of Diya (Blood-money) and the (ransom for) releasing of the captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for killing a Kafir (disbeliever)."Sahih Bukhari 9:83:50, See also: Sahih Bukhari 1:3:111, and Sahih Bukhari 4:52:283

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)."

Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

Quran (66:9) - O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end.

Here we go again. You dont like the translation so you find one that suits your ideals instead of one that is accurate. The one you used is in NO way accurate!

Prove that at this time he was in conflict with the Najran. Bring some sources to substantiate your claim! You just make it up as you go along.

Ibn KathirThe Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers, the Closest, then the Farthest Areas Allah commands the believers to fight the disbelievers, the closest in area to the Islamic state, then the farthest. This is why the Messenger of Allah started fighting the idolators in the Arabian Peninsula. When he finished with them and Allah gave him control over Makkah, Al-Madinah, At-Ta'if, Yemen, Yamamah, Hajr, Khaybar, Hadramawt and other Arab provinces, and the various Arab tribes entered Islam in large crowds, he then started fighting the People of the Scriptures. He began preparations to fight the Romans who were the closest in area to the Arabian Peninsula, and as such, had the most right to be called to Islam, especially since they were from the People of the Scriptures. The Prophet marched until he reached Tabuk and went back because of the extreme hardship, little rain and little supplies. This battle occurred on the ninth year after his Hijrah. In the tenth year, the Messenger of Allah was busy with the Farewell Hajj. The Messenger died eighty-one days after he returned from that Hajj, Allah chose him for what He had prepared for him ﴿in Paradise﴾. After his death, his executor, friend, and Khalifah, Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, became the leader. At that time, the religion came under attack and would have been defeated, if it had not been for the fact that Allah gave the religion firmness through Abu Bakr, who established its basis and made its foundations firm. He brought those who strayed from the religion back to it, and made those who reverted from Islam return. He took the Zakah from the evil people who did not want to pay it, and explained the truth to those who were unaware of it. On behalf of the Prophet , Abu Bakr delivered what he was entrusted with. Then, he started preparing the Islamic armies to fight the Roman cross worshippers, and the Persian fire worshippers. By the blessing of his mission, Allah opened the lands for him and brought down Caesar and Kisra and those who obeyed them among the servants. Abu Bakr spent their treasures in the cause of Allah, just as the Messenger of Allah had foretold would happen. This mission continued after Abu Bakr at the hands of he whom Abu Bakr chose to be his successor, Al-Faruq, the Martyr of the Mihrab, Abu Hafs, `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him.

With `Umar, Allah humiliated the disbelievers, suppressed the tyrants and hypocrites, and opened the eastern and western parts of the world. The treasures of various countries were brought to `Umar from near and far provinces, and he divided them according to the legitimate and accepted method. `Umar then died as a martyr after he lived a praise worthy life. Then, the Companions among the Muhajirin and Ansar agreed to chose after `Umar, `Uthman bin `Affan, Leader of the faithful and Martyr of the House, may Allah be pleased with him. During `Uthman's reign, Islam wore its widest garment and Allah's unequivocal proof was established in various parts of the world over the necks of the servants. Islam appeared in the eastern and western parts of the world and Allah's Word was elevated and His religion apparent. The pure religion reached its deepest aims against Allah's enemies, and whenever Muslims overcame an Ummah, they moved to the next one, and then the next one, crushing the tyranical evil doers. They did this in reverence to Allah's statement, (O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you,) Allah said next, and let them find harshness in you), meaning, let the disbelievers find harshness in you against them in battle. The complete believer is he who is kind to his believing brother, and harsh with his disbelieving enemy.

You use confirmation bias. And you cant even support your apologetics. Making a claim and then providing evidence for it are two entirely different things. Your using taqiyya!

""3. you get more reward for giving a slave to a relative."Generally not but if your relative is needy then yes. Helping relatives does take precedence:"It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards East or West; but it is righteousness to believe in Allah and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, FOR YOUR KIN, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer etc... 2:177

First of all this is speaking for the Muslims! I understand that Muslim relatives takes precedence over a slave or a non Muslim! Thats what I have been trying to tell you. Islam is bigoted. And Muslims take precedence over all non Muslims! And it doesnt have to be a relative. And thats not all that it says. It doesnt say they were in need. Your making assumptions! Show me where it says the Uncle was in need.

Volume 3, Book 47, Number 765:Narrated Kurib:

the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles."

And as for giving to the needy and the orphans etc... Yeah only if they are MUSLIM! Your zakat is not suppose to be used for non Muslims!

· Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, after quoting the hadeeth of Ibn �Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to Mu’aadh (may Allaah be pleased with him): “Tell them that they have to give sadaqah (charity) that is to be taken from their wealth and given to the poor”: “It is not permissible to give any part of zakaah to a kaafir, whether it is zakaat al-fitr or zakaat al-maal… Maalik, al-Layth, Ahmad and Abu Thawr said: ‘They (i.e., kaafirs) should not be given it.’”Zakaah should be given to the poor, those who have overwhelming debts, and those whose salaries are not enough to last until the end of the month, in accordance with the level of their needs.It is not permissible for the one who gives zakaat al-fitr to buy it back from the one to whom he has given it.(Fataawaa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen).

Islam is pure bigotry, fascism, and evil to its very core. And your selective reinterpretations will not change that. I think that will suffice!

Im not even going to go through all of your other lies and logical fallacies. I havent the time!

First off those hadith prove NOTHING! Except that Mohamed was a hypocrite and you can justify any immoral acitviety! All you have to say is that Mohamed or Islam was insulted. Or that they are non Muslims and they can be subjugated! And yes I have proven that he attacked people for the sole reason they were non Muslim and he wanted to impose Islam on them. Which according to sura 9:29 is justified. You are delusional and in complete and total denial of reality. And inconsistent like Mohamed and your demon Allah!

Allah's Messenger called Ali [and said]: “Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory,” and Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: “Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?” Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: ”Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger…” (Sahih Muslim 5917)

Then the apostle sent Khalid bin Walid… to the Banu al-Harith and ordered him to invite them to Islam three days before he attacked them. If they accepted then he was to accept it from them, and if they declined he was to fight them. So Khalid set out and came to them, and sent out riders in all directions inviting the people to Islam, saying, “If you accept Islam you will be safe.” So the men accepted Islam as they were invited. (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 959)

The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: If you come to a township (which has surrendered without a formal war) and stay therein, you have a share (that will be in the form of an award) in (the properties obtained from) it. If a township disobeys Allah and His Messenger (and actually fights against the Muslims) one-fifth of the booty seized therefrom is for Allah and His Apostle and the rest is for you. (Sahih Muslim 4346)

We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, “Muhammad with his force,” and turned tail and fled… The apostle seized the property piece by piece… (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 757)

When the apostle raided a people he waited until the morning. If he heard a call to prayer he held back; if he did not hear it he attacked. We came to Khaybar by night, and the apostle passed the night there; and when morning came he did not hear the call to prayer, so he rode and we rode with him. (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 757)

If he did not hear the call to prayer he raided them! You are in total denial of reality!

Before Muhammad’s Hijrah (Emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622), he used to sit in the assembly and invite the Meccans to Allah, citing the Quran and warning them of God’s punishment for mocking his prophets. Al-Nadr would then follow him and speak about heroes and kings of Persia, saying, "By God, Muhammad cannot tell a better story than I, and his talk is only of old fables which he has copied as I have." Al-Nadr is referring to legends and opaque histories about Arabs of long ago and possibly to Bible stories about such figures as Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, which Muhammad told, but according to his own inaccurate versions. On other days al-Nadr would interrupt Muhammad until the prophet silenced him. In reply to al-Nadir’s harassment, it is possible (scholars sometimes have difficulties matching up Quranic verses with historical events) that Allah sent down these verses to Muhammad concerning him or certainly other mockers in Mecca, according to the account of Ibn Abbas, Muhammad’s cousin, who is considered a reliable transmitter of traditions:

25:6 Say [Prophet], "It was sent down by Him who knows the secrets of the heavens and earth. He is all forgiving and merciful." (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Qur’an, Oxford UP, 2004)

83:13 ... [W]hen Our revelations are recited to him, he says, "Ancient fables!" 14 No indeed! Their hearts are encrusted with what they have done. 15 No indeed! On that day they will be screened off from their Lord, 16 they will burn in Hell, 17 and they will be told, "This is what you call a lie." (Haleem)

Muhammad did not take revenge on him—not yet—even though the verses in Sura 83 promise a dismal eternal future for mockers. Muhammad’s revenge was not long coming. It was al-Nadir’s bad fortune to join Mecca’s army, riding north to protect their caravan, which Muhammad attacked at the Battle of Badr in AD 624. The story-telling polytheist was captured, and on Muhammad’s return journey back to Medina, Ali, Muhammad’s son-in-law, at Muhammad’s order, beheaded him, instead of getting some possible ransom money. He was one of two prisoners who were executed and not allowed to be ransomed by their clans—all because they wrote poems and told stories critiquing Muhammad.

A similar story as that of al-Nadir can be told about Uqba. He too harassed and mocked Muhammad in Mecca and wrote derogatory verses about him. He too was captured during the Battle of Badr, and Muhammad ordered him to be executed. "But who will look after my children, O Muhammad?" Uqba cried with anguish. "Hell," retorted the prophet coldly. Then the sword of one of his followers cut through Uqba’s neck.

Source: Bukhari, vol. 4, no. 2934; Muslim, vol. 3, nos. 4422, 4424; Ibn Ishaq, p. 308 / 458. Bukhari and Muslim are reliable collectors and editors of the hadith (words and deeds of Muhammad outside of the Quran). These three passages from the hadith depict Muhammad calling on Allah for revenge on this poet.

Asma was a poetess who belonged to a tribe of Medinan pagans, and whose husband was named Yazid b. Zayd. She composed a poem blaming the Medinan pagans for obeying a stranger (Muhammad) and for not taking the initiative to attack him by surprise. When the Allah-inspired prophet heard what she had said, he asked, "Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?" A member of her husband’s tribe volunteered and crept into her house that night. She had five children, and the youngest was sleeping at her breast. The assassin gently removed the child, drew his sword, and plunged it into her, killing her in her sleep.

The following morning, the assassin defied anyone to take revenge. No one took him up on his challenge, not even her husband. In fact, Islam became powerful among his tribe. Previously, some members who had kept their conversion secret now became Muslims openly, "because they saw the power of Islam," conjectures Ibn Ishaq.

Abu Afak, an centenarian elder of Medina, belonging to a group of clans who were associated with the god Manat (though another account has him as a Jew), wrote a derogatory poem about Muhammad, extolling the ancestors of his tribe who were strong enough to overthrow mountains and to resist submitting to an outsider (Muhammad) who divides two large Medinan tribes with religious commands like "permitted" and "forbidden." That is, the poet is referring to Muhammad’s legal decrees about things that are forbidden (e.g. pork and alcohol) and permitted (e.g. other meats like beef and camel). Before the Battle of Badr, Muhammad let him live.

After the battle, the prophet queried, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" That night, Salim b. Umayr "went forth and killed him." One of the Muslims wrote a poem in reply: "A hanif [monotheist or Muslim] gave you a thrust in the night saying / ‘Take that Abu Afak in spite of your age!’" Muhammad eliminated him, which shows religious violence. Islam is not the religion of peace.

Source: Ibn Ishaq p. 675 / 995.

624: Ibn Sunayna

It is on the heels of this assassination that Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant, was assassinated. With the success of the five conspirators, Muhammad said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Shortly afterwards, Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon and killed Ibn Sunayna, with whom Muhayyisa had some social and business relations. However, Muhayyisa’s elder brother, not a Muslim at the time, beat the assassin, the younger brother, saying, "You enemy of God, did you kill him when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?" Muhayyisa retorted that if Muhammad had ordered even the elder brother’s assassination, he would have carried it out. The elder was impressed: "By God, a religion which can bring you to this is marvelous!" And he became a Muslim. That is, the elder brother implies that Muhammad must be a great leader and worthy of devotion if he commands such lethal reverence and deadly obedience from his followers.

Then Muhayyisa wrote a poem that celebrates such obedience. "I would smite his [the elder brother’s] neck with a sharp sword, / A blade as white as salt from polishing. / My downward stroke never misses its mark." Advancing religious violence, these lines in the poem show how deadly poetry could be, and they match the Muslim’s poem against Abu Afak (no. 4, above): "a hanif gave you a thrust in the night." Kab’s poem, it should be recalled, was far milder. These poems that a Westerner reads in the early Islamic source are jarring. It seems the early Muslim authors of the documents relish inserting them into their books.

And I also noticed that you had nothing to say about the bigotry of the zakat not allowed to be used for non Muslim poor. Thats pretty evil in and of itself.

Obviously Mohamed was a hypocrite. He killed who he wanted to and pardoned whom he wanted to. So he was inconsistent. Thats all you have proven. So what?

I didnt take anything out of context,. Saying I take something out of context and proving it are two entirely different things. I provided the evidence and you post irrelevant hadith that have to do with the topic. You see into it what you want. But dismiss the clear evidence! Those hadith say nothing. Absolutely NOTHING! Except that Mohamed was inconsistent and a hypocrite! Just like every Muslim I have ever spoken to in my life! And thats hundreds over the years!

And of course the Quran would say that. Its funny how back in the day when your classical scholars thought the world was flat and that the sun orbited the earth thats what your scholars said. Now that the West has produced scientific evidence your modern day scholars try and reinterpret everything. So what you do and what all Muslims do is reinterpret the Quran and mold it into what they wish it said instead of what it realy said and how Mohamed and the scholars thought and believed! And thats all you do every time I bring a topic! I bring you clear evidence and you say its wrong and bring some irrelevant ambiguous hadith. And then you bring some ayat and then i show you what your scholars say and it is different from what you say! Its the same thing over and over! Your just brainwashed and incapable of objective reasoning, critical thinking and intellectual integrity! It ABSURD!

Jamal said, "RTB scholar Kenneth Samples says, “So while the Bible doesn’t formally and explicitly condemn slavery, neither does it condone it.” You said produce scholars that say the Bible is mum on the issue. That is what I’m doing. "

I've never heard of him but I'm not going to do the muslim thing and play this game. I'll research it, but obviously I don't care. I've read these verses IN THEIR CONTEXT and the bible condemns slavery but I'll see why Kenneth says otherwise. Then you said, " But not everybody believes in the same god that you do."For once, we agree. The issue for me has never been is Allah the God of the Bible. It's been which is actually God. That God is the one who I worship and he's the one who had said he's not extinguishing sin. He'll punish it. There's no amount of reasoning to get around this Jamal. You can argue and postulate all you like, but the fact remains that you remain in your sins and God will send all sinners to hell. Quit Islam, quit sinning, trust that Jesus is God and he paid for it all. You asked, "Didn’t Jesus himself get angry? I don’t know, but if you could explain the Temple incident:Creating a whip from some cords, "he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. But he said to those who sold doves, ‘Get these out of here! Do not make My Father’s house a house of trade!’ I am not making blind accusations or trying to lie. Could you explain the Temple incident?"

He didn't harbor anger. You misunderstand and maybe there's a language barrier here. The jews and money changers were sinning. Jesus, being angry, drove them out of the temple. He didn't harbor (or hold onto his) anger in the sense that even days afterwards he was fuming about it, neither did he wish ill on them or say 'I hope you all die or get sick', etc. It's also not calling down curses on someone's head whether it's justified or not. You can be angry over a situation, which is what Jesus did, and not sin. But to hang onto it is sin. There is something called righteous angry when people sin Jamal. Finally, those you'll disagree, if God gets angry it's not sin but Jesus didn't do that here anyways.I have to go to work now so I'll have to reply as i get a chance.

jamal said, "Old Testament? Islam is much closer in religion to Judaism than Christianity is. "

I'm sorry but any similarities between Judiasm and Islam are superficial. 1. The Jews' god is named YHWH,who is a triune entity (the BEING that is YHWH is made up of three persons)as opposed to Allah, a singular entity. There are many distinctions between the two but by and large this is huge. If the God is different, the similarities don't matter. Old testament references to the triune entity that is YHWH: Judges chapter 7, Numbers chapters 22-24Isaiah 48:16. Pretty much the later part of the book of Daniel but I have to look up the reference.

Also, we use the old testament, that which the Jews call the 'Tanakh' and their cannon of scriptures is almost EXACTLY the same books we have in the bible. The difference is the order of the books in the Tanakh but that's not a big issue either so long as the books are the same. There is active prophecy still unfolding today and it's lining up with prophecy in the new testament, naming the book of Revelation.

Furthermore...and I know you haven't considered this, but the first Christians were monotheistic Jews and they lived in a stringent monotheistic environment. Mohammad before his first revelation was a pagan, living amongest pagans and the only interaction he had with Christianity were Christians who were deemed heretical who migrated to Saudi Arabia, which tended to be a dumping ground for all things like that. You pray towards Mecca five times a day which the Jews do not do, venerate a black stone, which the Jews do NOT do, and participate in Ramadan and Hajj, which Jews do not do. You observe Eids in commemoration of or revolving around Ishmael and not Issac nor the promises God made concerning Isaac. In short, your god different, your rituals are different, your prophet was an arab and not a jew thus violating Deut 18, the manner of revelation to him was different, the reason behind your rituals is different from the Jews. AND....you don't use the same scriptures or the same books the Jews use. You use the Koran. They have the tanakh.No, Islam is not similar to Judaism. Far from it.

Fathul-Bari, 3579is not sahih, so why is this relevant? What are the other supporting hadith that are Sahih that tells the same story.

I just want to point out as a side note that if I pulled something from Fathul-Bari that you felt was disparaging to Mo's character you would scream "It's not sahih, it doesn't count."

But see? I'm not doing that here. Where are there other narrations from the Sahaba that support this claim?

Now for the other, it's Sahih. Good job, but we're not told how large the animal was nor are we told how much dough was being used. Is it possible that the translators omitted this information or didn't see it as revelant? Maybe. Could this be an exaggeration? I don't know. The last part of the bread baking could be emphatic language or tense to used to talk about how much food there was left or how much meat there was.

Furthermore, even if a hadith were 'sahih' it doesn't preclude the possibility that someone had interaction with the christian scriptures and created it to the prophet to aid them in their dawah. It just sounds too similar to something a da'wahist would do.

But here's what I do know, the deemed 'reliable' hadiths are deemed as such but they come over two hundred years after the death of Mo and his companions so how do we know it's reliable? Where are the other narrations from different companions who attest to these 'miracles'.

We have the Gospels written by 4 different people and they verify each other. There are slight differences but they compliment each other and add more information from the perspective of another person as to what they witnessed happening.

These hadith are only from one person at a time.

Also, and I take the blame for this because I wasn't clear here, but YHWH sending miracles was to verify the message of the prophet TO THE JEWS (stressed for emphasis and not to shout).

These hadiths were from arab believers.

Last, and here again I need to take the mulligan on this one, God is not the only one who allows for miracles. Demons can also produce miracles. The who hindu kundalini movement happening now is an example. Spontaneous healings are happening and it's not of God it's of that false spirit. Same with sufi muslims working themselves into trances and then driving nails into their heads. They're not bleeding. That's a miracle too as per the definition of a miracle but it's not of God.

If you are seeking to prove Mo did miracles. Okay. I can concede the point.

If you are seeking to prove Mo did miracles by the power of the God who created heaven and earth then do the following: 1. find hadith from other companions who witness the exact same thing in the two hadiths you posted. 2. Find more miracles Allah send down for the Jews to verify Mo's message. There's over 200,000 hadith out there and I know it seems daunting but you found these. Surely there are other websites out there to direct you to other support.

Here we go. When I said, " Is it possible that the translators omitted this information or didn't see it as revelant?" Bad word choice, should have said narrators or transmitters instead of translators though translators for tafsirs are becoming more and more unreliable and changing words (ahem...yusuf ali).

Second, "Last, and here again I need to take the mulligan on this one, God is not the only one who allows for miracles." D'oh! Should have said God is not the only one who does miracles through the hands on his prophets. I meant everything else. There are demonic entities who pass themselves off for God and their followers as prophets doing his will.Wait a second...doesn't

2 Corin 11:14 say just that???? And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Also, I said. "These hadith are only from one person at a time." Naturally that's the nature of the narration i know, but what I mean is there should be other narrations from different people who attested to the same thing.

Women in Islam

American Freedom Law Center

America

The Truth about CAIR

FAQ Page

On this website, we engage Muslims and the foundations of Islam without trying to be "PC". We feel honesty is better than disguised language. As you can read on our FAQ, this is out of love, not out of hatred. Thanks, and we're looking forward to seeing your comments!